Question on the "plane" that hit Pentagon

[thereismore]

I'm a L(M)IHOP. Here is a question that bothers me: If the Pentagon wasn't hit by a plane, where is that plane?

[hobbit709]

1. Probably at

the bottom of the Atlantic.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

2. What's a "L(M)IHOP"? n/t

[sabra]

3. Let it happen on purpose

mihop = made it happen on purpose

[OldLeftieLawyer]

7. Thank you n/t

[sabra]

4. there's a 9/11 forum in DU, you could prolly get some good

opinions and analysis there too...

[Avalux]

5. If the Pentagon WAS hit by a plane, where is that plane?

Same dilemma really. There was no wreckage. It was probably shot down over the Atlantic.

[jobycom]

10. Yeah, there was

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

Not that anyone believes evidence anymore.

[MrSammo1]

12. It would be nice if

snopes actually HAD some evidence on their site.
But they don't!

Just lots of unfounded hearsay.

[kedrys]

6. Check out this book online

The New Pearl Harbor

Chapter 2 goes into details of what the object that hit the Pentagon wasn't - it's as far as I got into it so far, but the author mentions that he later in the book considers what actually happened to Flight 77. It's a good read, albeit depressing.

[dbeach]

8. RUMMY said missle hit his beloved pentagon

far from his office of course


http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Missile-Not-Flight-77.html
"It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them."

[lenidog]

9. Here is one mans opinion on your question

Long article but worth a read.


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html

[MrSammo1]

13. more

unfounded hearsay that the physical evidence says is a lie.

[thereismore]

11. Thanks, that was very helpful. n/t

[DulceDecorum]

14. For some time after 911,

the lists of the Boeing 757s and 767s which are flying were reduced to allow for the complete loss of those hulls.
The figures on many of the lists have now been revised upwards.
A simple count demonstrates that the two planes appear to be back in circulation. Where exactly would require more effort than I am willing to expend.
Plus you should also be aware of the fact that the majority of the lists only cover civilian aircraft.
If the plane has acquired a military designation
(as did civilian N4610
which became US Air National Guard 83-4610
before reverting back to N4610)
then it is not going to show up at all.

Surprisingly enough, United Airlines planes continue to maintain current US registrations. This might have some bearing on the revision of the numbers.

Also, both United Airlines as well as the actual anonymous owners of the aircraft
have retained the services of State Street Bank and Trust
in what appears to be a serious conflict of interest.
At this present moment, it rather looks as if the actions of State Street Bank and Trust have contributed greatly to the demise of United Airlines.